Eric Schmidt of Google sits on David Cameron’s business adviser panel.

Is David Cameron proud of seeking advice from a person who’s proud to be doing his best to undermine the UK economy, harm its chances of closing the deficit, and proud to be undermining the prospects of investment in thew UK by denying the government the resources to do just that?

3 reminds us that we all have to suffer the financial consequences of actions taken by very few; and

4 demands that we forgo meaningful state support in times of genuine need and take responsibility for ourselves at all times

but then associates itself with autocrats and sociopaths like Schmidt who epitomises the attitudes that got us into this mess in the first place. But, hey, inherited, not earned, wealth, not to say the pleasures of sucking up to people like Schmidt, can do that to people.

Despite what he may believe to the contrary, what Eric Schmidt stands for is not capitalism, it is the antithesis of a truly free market.

I’ve just signed Frances and Keith Smith’s petition on Change.org “.@AmazonUK: Pay corporation tax in the UK”.

By its sheer size, Google like Amazon already benefits from economies of scale, eg increased purchasing power. By applying some legal and accounting trickery, why should it also receive an effective tax dispensation on profits earned in the UK? When two parties compete in the same market place, the hand of the State should not favour one over the other.

Since the whole gist of Amazon UK’s tax avoidance is to argue that its massive warehouse and distribution centres in the UK do not constitute a permanent establishment (and that is one piece of law that should be tidied up pdq if Vince Cale is serious about tax avoidance) it somewhat beggars belief that Cameron wishes to take advice who cannot even do the decent thing and establish a permanent business in the UK.